Subject: RE: Simplified Artistic License [osd]
From: "Lawrence E. Rosen" <>
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 12:45:22 -0700

> - First and foremost, I want a license which is less 
> complicated than the existing licenses.

You're entitled to that, but we've warned you to consult an attorney.
"Complexity" is related to "enforceability."  Attorneys will almost
certainly not recommend your license to their clients because it is not
a professionally-written license.  (Neither is my software
professionally written -- as an attorney I expect programmers to write
my software; as a programmer, you should expect an attorney to write
your license.)

> - Second, I want changes to my source code to be properly documented.

Depending upon what constraints you place on derivative works, you may
run afoul of the OSD with this goal.  But that is not intended as a
criticism of your current license, which I don't have time right now to

> - Third, I want to prevent my name and the name of my product 
> from being used as an endorsement I did not give.  (On this 
> point it is very similar to you wanting to prevent others 
> from using OSI certification marks as endorsements you did 
> not approve.)

One more time, let me explain that OSI protects its certification marks
by trademark law, not copyright licenses, and you should consider doing
the same to protect the name of your product.

> - And fourth, I want the license approved as a TEMPLATE so it 

Commendable goal.  But don't get your hopes up that your license will be
adopted by other projects.  

/Larry Rosen

license-discuss archive is at